4 ms·

> Russia paid or otherwise clandestinely influenced their own insurgents to start violent protests against the Ukraine government Violent protests had already

> Russia paid or otherwise clandestinely influenced their own insurgents to start violent protests against the Ukraine government Violent protests had already been going on for some time. At that point the elected Ukrainian government had already been overthrown https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolution_of_Dignity https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolution_of_Dignity The degree of Russian influence, compared to the degree of civil unrest naturally caused by the events in the capital is debatable, especially given spreading rumors of neo-nazis involved. Given that the "Azov Battalion" is a thing and thus the rumors were somewhat true, it seems that Russia barely had any job to do to tip the scale

def_true_false 5y ago
Far right attitudes are no less common in Russia, including the Russian armed forces. Given a large number of participants, the chance that neo-nazis (as well as all other kinds of people) are involved is close to 100%.
- foverzar 5y ago
  > Far right attitudes are no less common in Russia, including the Russian armed forces What is the base of that assertion? Also, it seems to me that good old, practically a hundred years old meme based, "left-right" model is not really applicable to CIS countries. Nazism and it's symbolics has kind of a very specific set of connotations, at least in eastern slavic culture. Though we can enjoy diving in moral and statistical relativism, it seems to me that openly endorsing neo-nazism on a governmental level, up to using nazi symbolics in heraldics, is a red flag that is pretty hard to challenge in it's groutesque. Besides, it's not like "Azov" is an isolated incident, just something more flashing. The issue of language is another great thorn, but you really need to understand the context and the sentiment. In any case, we digress. It's not like this is the issue of Russian armed forces, it's an issue of what and why served as the catalyst for some people not to accept the new government, after the previous one was overthrown. Besides, the way it was handled is what really sealed the deal. E.g I have a video of this event https://edition.cnn.com/2014/06/03/world/europe/ukraine-luhansk-building-attack/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2014/06/03/world/europe/ukraine-luha... and it's a bloody mess of screaming, blood and just looks like a terrorist attack. This one actually also gives an interesting angle to the MH17 disaster, which happened just after that air strike. In fact, the more I look at the dates, the more I wonder how the hell did the Ukraininan government conduct air-bound military operations on some territory, but still direct civillian planes over this territory.
notch656a 5y ago
Azov Batallion may be far-right but I think the real reason why they're mentioned here is because they helped kick Russia's ass in Ukraine and were instrumental in the early fighting all the way up to Donetsk Airport. Russians are butt-hurt their ass were kicked by pathetic neo-nazi ideology. Like it or not, Azov Battalion is partially responsible for why Ukraine still has as much territory as it does.
- foverzar 5y ago
  > the real reason why they're mentioned here ...is simply because they are the most evident and universally recognized symbol of influence of neo-nazism on modern Ukraine's politics. > Like it or not, Azov Battalion is partially responsible for why Ukraine still has as much territory as it does. I mean, good for them! Not even sure why you call them and their ideology "pathetic". Millitary-wise, it's a great feat, real-world nazis were also quite efficient. It's just that it is still an evidence of what kind of sentiments are a driving force of post-coup Ukraininan government, which gives a rather clear answer to the question of whether Russia needed to do much (or anything at all) for enough people to turn against new government. As simple as that.
  - notch656a 5y ago
    So you're saying Russia didn't act because the people that want to (and actually did) kill Russians were who they actually wanted in influence? Why would Azov Battalion be a deciding factor on Russia's desire to influence Ukraine? I would think Russia would not want Azov influence in Ukraine. >Not even sure why you call them and their ideology "pathetic" I called their ideology pathetic, not their fighting force. Their fighting force is commendable.
    - foverzar 5y ago
      > So you're saying Russia didn't act because the people that want to (and actually did) kill Russians were who they actually wanted in influence? Erm, no, what specific Russia's action do you have in mind? I am not really sure what you are saying, but it seems completely out of touch with what I meant and the topic generally. You are missing the point here, Azov is just an undeniable universal evidence of Ukraine's government being in bed with neo-nazis and it's a sentiment enough for people to disaprove and rally against, nothing more is implied here. I could just as well use the examle of language policy, or openly prasing nazi collaborators, or like how the Ukraine voted against heroisation of facism in the UN. But none of this is as simple to google and go "holy shit, how is this a thing?" as Azov, that's all.

def_true_false 5y ago

Far right attitudes are no less common in Russia, including the Russian armed forces. Given a large number of participants, the chance that neo-nazis (as well as all other kinds of people) are involved is close to 100%.

foverzar 5y ago
> Far right attitudes are no less common in Russia, including the Russian armed forces What is the base of that assertion? Also, it seems to me that good old, practically a hundred years old meme based, "left-right" model is not really applicable to CIS countries. Nazism and it's symbolics has kind of a very specific set of connotations, at least in eastern slavic culture. Though we can enjoy diving in moral and statistical relativism, it seems to me that openly endorsing neo-nazism on a governmental level, up to using nazi symbolics in heraldics, is a red flag that is pretty hard to challenge in it's groutesque. Besides, it's not like "Azov" is an isolated incident, just something more flashing. The issue of language is another great thorn, but you really need to understand the context and the sentiment. In any case, we digress. It's not like this is the issue of Russian armed forces, it's an issue of what and why served as the catalyst for some people not to accept the new government, after the previous one was overthrown. Besides, the way it was handled is what really sealed the deal. E.g I have a video of this event https://edition.cnn.com/2014/06/03/world/europe/ukraine-luhansk-building-attack/index.html https://edition.cnn.com/2014/06/03/world/europe/ukraine-luha... and it's a bloody mess of screaming, blood and just looks like a terrorist attack. This one actually also gives an interesting angle to the MH17 disaster, which happened just after that air strike. In fact, the more I look at the dates, the more I wonder how the hell did the Ukraininan government conduct air-bound military operations on some territory, but still direct civillian planes over this territory.

notch656a 5y ago

Azov Batallion may be far-right but I think the real reason why they're mentioned here is because they helped kick Russia's ass in Ukraine and were instrumental in the early fighting all the way up to Donetsk Airport. Russians are butt-hurt their ass were kicked by pathetic neo-nazi ideology. Like it or not, Azov Battalion is partially responsible for why Ukraine still has as much territory as it does.

foverzar 5y ago
> the real reason why they're mentioned here ...is simply because they are the most evident and universally recognized symbol of influence of neo-nazism on modern Ukraine's politics. > Like it or not, Azov Battalion is partially responsible for why Ukraine still has as much territory as it does. I mean, good for them! Not even sure why you call them and their ideology "pathetic". Millitary-wise, it's a great feat, real-world nazis were also quite efficient. It's just that it is still an evidence of what kind of sentiments are a driving force of post-coup Ukraininan government, which gives a rather clear answer to the question of whether Russia needed to do much (or anything at all) for enough people to turn against new government. As simple as that.
- notch656a 5y ago
  So you're saying Russia didn't act because the people that want to (and actually did) kill Russians were who they actually wanted in influence? Why would Azov Battalion be a deciding factor on Russia's desire to influence Ukraine? I would think Russia would not want Azov influence in Ukraine. >Not even sure why you call them and their ideology "pathetic" I called their ideology pathetic, not their fighting force. Their fighting force is commendable.
  - foverzar 5y ago
    > So you're saying Russia didn't act because the people that want to (and actually did) kill Russians were who they actually wanted in influence? Erm, no, what specific Russia's action do you have in mind? I am not really sure what you are saying, but it seems completely out of touch with what I meant and the topic generally. You are missing the point here, Azov is just an undeniable universal evidence of Ukraine's government being in bed with neo-nazis and it's a sentiment enough for people to disaprove and rally against, nothing more is implied here. I could just as well use the examle of language policy, or openly prasing nazi collaborators, or like how the Ukraine voted against heroisation of facism in the UN. But none of this is as simple to google and go "holy shit, how is this a thing?" as Azov, that's all.